We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: devt
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive Conservative Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2116
Description[?]:
| devt |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Appointments and requirements for government employees.
Old value:: Government employees are selected and appointed in a political way.
Current: All government employees have to promise political independence.
Proposed: All government employees have to promise political independence.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 06:09:44, September 22, 2005 CET | From |  Populist Liberal Party | To | Debating the devt |
| Message | We will oppose, again. The only way to enforce political independence is to make employees nearly impossible to fire. So, not only does a cabinet member have to deal with subordinates he cannot trust, but he cannot get rid of them, either-- even if they're crappy. |
| Date | 13:55:03, September 22, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the devt |
| Message | I wish. and Support. |
| Date | 13:55:41, September 22, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the devt |
| Message | And PLP...are you telling me you've never fired an employee for other than political reasons? |
| Date | 16:09:53, September 22, 2005 CET | From | Populist Liberal Party | To | Debating the devt |
| Message | The point is, that in order to prevent an employee from being fired for political reasons, civil service protections make it nearly impossible to fire them for any reason (because we could claim incompetence, but the employee would claim it was political). |
| Date | 00:54:19, September 23, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the devt |
| Message | There are plenty of other illegal reasons to fire a person. What's to stop them from using one of them in its stead? Should we not have those laws to keep them from being abused as well? (ex. of illegal causes for firing = gender, race, sexual orientation, medical problems, etc.) |
| Date | 01:04:38, September 23, 2005 CET | From | Populist Liberal Party | To | Debating the devt |
| Message | Everyone who knows the civil service system knows that it is very hard to fire someone who is a civil service employee, much harder than it is for a private business that still faces the same restrictions on firing due to gender, race, etc.. One would not question our recent firing of a receptionist from the PLP campaign office because she frequently contradicted our pro-choice stands in her conversations with visitors. Everyone knows it was not due to gender as we have as many female as male employees. Similarly, if someone in the ministry of health and social services fails to comply with PLP policy on the compassionate administration of these services because he is a conservative and believes in being abrupt with clients, we should be able to fire him for that. However, we could not under the proposed new guidelines, as that would be deemed a "political firing." |
| Date | 06:25:53, September 23, 2005 CET | From | Kanjoran People's Party | To | Debating the devt |
| Message | Fine I'm tired of supporting political indepence anyways. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 339 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 260 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If you want to know how many players there are in Particracy right now, check out the Game Statistics buried at the bottom of the World Map screen. |
| Random quote: "Dictators ride to and fro upon tigers which they dare not dismount. And the tigers are getting hungry." - Winston Churchill |